Month: September 2017

In 1940, Harry Price popularized it as the “most haunted house in England” and then the knave set about to muck it all up with some of his own poltergeist antics. Those who had experienced Borley eventually came to believe there was something truly strange there and then eventually to believe that Price was responsible for hoaxing most of it. He was England’s premier ghost hunter, and until Borley he was one who frequently debunked claims of the paranormal. Therefore when he endorsed Borley Rectory as being a true haunt, people listened.

Attempts to debunk the haunting fell very short, however, long after Price’s death when members of the Psychical Research Society spoke with those various residents involved (those they could find) decades after-the-fact. There was a lot of rationalizing, and plain ennui kept the investigators from doing their own investigation.

For example, Rector Eric Guy Smith’s widow came to fervently believe that there had been no such haunting and squarely condemned Price. The investigators were honest enough to quote her contemporary letters back and forth with Harry Price to show she had reservations, but they wouldn’t challenge her explanations. They liked Mrs. Smith’s excuse that the passing train lights were responsible for the glowing lights seen in the rectory rooms 7 and 11 (numbers given on a map of the house). They thought this reasonable and didn’t see any reason to pursue anything preternatural. Yet as any map will show, this wing of the house was opposite the train tracks which were far away on the other side of the house. Borley Rectory was also surrounded by high trees.

The train tracks can bee seen about a mile to the right of the rectory, still shown as the major building in Borley. Rooms 7 and 11 face in the opposite direction.

Anybody can look on a Google Map today to see the juxtaposition of the tracks in relation to the rectory. Some staunch believer in the haunting, or for whatever reason, made sure the map still shows the rectory, as though the old demolished building is still standing in Borley.

Eric Guy Smith’s letters to Price indicate he kept an open mind and believed something evil was afoot, though he did not believe in ghosts.

Rector Smith was, of course, Anglican. And although the next Rector, Lionel Foyster was Anglican, his wife Marianne was Catholic. It is a fact uncovered by all who investigate such claims of hauntings that, frankly, Catholics make for the best “haunted” victims. Their teachings don’t really allow them to believe in ghosts. So that when strange things happen some tend to believe evil spirits are responsible. The Catholic Church is adamant. Ghosts do not exist. . . but demons do.

My own personal experience with the survivors of hauntings has revealed that amongst Catholics such anxiety was created in them during the “haunting” that they experienced its effects even when back home (in the case I am referring to the haunting occurred during a vacation). One survivor even experienced being thrown out of bed, and then eventually admitted that when she no longer believed in it (the haunting) the experiences stopped.

This pattern rings true in some of the most famous hauntings. The “demonologists” Ed and Lorraine Warren even used to warn those they consulted that the haunting could follow them if the moved. This was supposedly experienced by the Lutzes, the objects of the much maligned Amityville Horror.

I’m not here arguing the authenticity of various cases or of all the details and claims made about them. I am drawing a similarity– invariably the worst hauntings are experienced by Catholics, and the “symptoms” of the haunt follow the same pattern: such fear is developed that remarkable events take place suggestive of supernatural power (poltergeist) or the fear is so intense that somewhat unusual events in the house are given the most frightening interpretation and thereby the witnesses frighten themselves even more into an irrational state.

Arthur C. Clark even wonder if during such moments the brain and eye relationship is reversed and the eye acts not as a receiver of light but as a projector of what is in the mind. The “haunted” victim then is seeing an apparition which their own mind has created.

In the SPR’s superficial investigation of Borley Rectory the combined authors (their work culminated in The Haunting of Borley Rectory, 1956) state that Marianne Foyster leaned toward Catholicism. This statement was based on the fact she had been heard to pray to St. Anthony during one of the poltergeist moments in the Rectory. Mrs. Foyster was, in fact, Catholic. Anybody searching Ancestry.com can uncover her documentation to Canada in 1924 and 1926 (years before the haunting in 1931-32) where she lists herself as Anglo-Catholic.

Everybody was eager to blame Mrs. Foyster for the haunting, since its most intense phase occurred during her first 2 years at the rectory with her husband. He was much older than her, and the excuses are that she needed to get away. She hated the dull rectory and wanted to live a more interesting life, and those who say she invented it all say that her motive was to force her husband to move away to another living.

It is a fact, however, that she maintained a flower shop in London for 18 months and was seldom at the rectory except on the weekends. When there the problems occurred.

Some of the events were childish, including the turning of water into ink– an old magician trick of slyly putting a pellet of ink into someone’s water glass. Such pellets were easily available at all magical shops in London. Harry Price, though endorsing the haunting, admitted in private letters that he believed Mrs. Foyster was to blame.

She seems most certainly to have been responsible for some of it.

But most of this negative opinion of Marianne Foyster comes down to us through the sieve of the SPR in London. It was not their intent to besmirch her, but their level of investigation was not anything that lived up to the word. It was rationalizing based on what they had heard.

There was much that needed investigating at the Rectory, but little was truly done. Price took advantage of it. Others tried and came up with various haunting entities. But few have considered that Marianne Foyster may have believed in the haunting more than the naysayers have realized. Like all good Catholics she would have been raised with the teaching that ghosts don’t exist. But demons do. . .

It is this difference in Catholics and protestants that is critical. Protestants might be disposed to believe in ghosts, that is, surviving personalities, whereas ultimately if things happen that cannot be explained, Catholics will fear the worst. Those I have known have been sent into towers of adrenaline, and the far more interesting powers of the brain came to be involved, powers that could throw a person from bed in a fit of adrenaline.

The paranormal crowd of a 100 years ago explained why some did not experience a haunting in a house and others seemed to act as a conduit for it. The explanation was: some are “sensitives”– the word used to explain the mediumistic. They had channeling powers where as most don’t. Therefore a haunting surrounds one individual and the others are only ephemeral witnesses to minor events in the house– moans, poltergeist effects– and tend to think the “sensitive” is merely hoaxing.

There may be a median ground between the two extremes: the “sensitive” is not channeling supernatural forces but rather is so intensely believing in the haunting about them that they are facilitating unusual events. Fear causes us to concentrate like nothing else. If you have the faith, say unto this mountain be ye removed to the sea, and it will be so.

The other explanation is a classic one: That the house is so designed (incidentally) as to house enormous electromagnetic power, and the “sensitive” in this case is channeling this power to create (inadvertantly) the effects of the haunting.

All the theories underscore one thing: some houses are very different. Strange events happen to some within them and not to others, and no one can come up with a satisfactory all-encompassing explanation. The house then truly is haunted. . . . but by what?

* * *

Since 1990 Gian J. Quasar has investigated a broad range of mysterious subjects, from strange disappearances to serial murders, earning in that time the unique distinction of being likened to “the real life Kolchak.” However, he is much more at home with being called The Quester or Q Man. “He’s bloody eccentric, an historian with no qualifications who sticks his nose into affairs and gets results.” He is the author of several books, one of which inspired a Resolution in Congress.

Aside from the auto-wrecking connection, I have speculated (as have many others) that EAR had some contact in real estate or even construction in order to account for the complexity of his prowling MO. Roofing has always been a favorite of theorists. Did EAR work in the roofing business? This would give him an elevated view of a neighborhood. . . .But

How about fencing?

EAR struck in old neighborhoods in the beginning and then very frequently in new neighborhoods thereafter. This has inspired us to believe in construction connections, but new neighborhoods need new fences. Building fences around houses along a street will give him more than ample time to check out the unfinished and finished homes inside, even if just looking in the windows during a break.

So, we may have someone whose family had major auto-wrecking connections within which EAR worked part time or got some old clunkers to drive once in a while while his VW was being worked on.

I don’t say this academically. The connection has come up in my continuing investigation. (I just can’t sit and wait for another month for DNA on RAP, so I’ve been digging around again hoping I can cut corners, or if a negative comes up in the match be ready to pursue every other angle with the POIs).

Aside from EAR’s ability at jumping fences, he also knew how to bring down a fence (at No. 10) with one push of his foot. It must have been a fence in need of repair. He just could not risk angrily kicking down the fence where he stood. He knew how to do it. Off the top of my head, this is the only thing that indicates he knew fences. It’s pretty thin. . . . But on the notepaper he left behind I found an interesting clue. It’s not Imells.

Those interested, check out the back of the map again.

* * *

Since 1990 Gian J. Quasar has investigated a broad range of mysterious subjects, from strange disappearances to serial murders, earning in that time the unique distinction of being likened to “the real life Kolchak.” However, he is much more at home with being called The Quester or Q Man. “He’s bloody eccentric, an historian with no qualifications who sticks his nose into affairs and gets results.” He is the author of several books, one of which inspired a Resolution in Congress.

A “haunted house” is supposed to be the only tangible thing in the paranormal realm. It’s a real building. Certain effects are repeatedly described, always by more than one person, so that the witnesses are believable. You would think therefore that a study or investigation of a “haunted house” would be taken more seriously and presented far more professionally than they are.

One side rationalizes and dismisses the effects– sounds, creaks, groans, doors slamming, “shadow people”– as the odd effects of an old house and the tricks of light and shadows. The other side– the “believers”– each have their own axe to grind.

Haunted houses are not believable because they are not investigated seriously. Only the theories are rehashed.

Taking two of the most famous cases highlights the inconsistencies that plague the genre.

Amityville Horror

The haunting of the Amityville Horror house was set in motion by the blessing of the priest on the house. He heard a deep voice order him to “Get out!” and he got slapped in the face. The Lutz’s came to believe that demons possessed the house. The church would not exorcise the house because the church does not believe objects can be possessed, only people.

Hans Holzer also investigates. He believes in ghosts. To him it’s an irritable Indian chief on horse back, which he snaps in a polaroid. Therefore it is surviving personalities which are to blame.

Demons and surviving personalities (ghosts) are not the same thing.

The Haunting in Connecticut

Ed and Lorraine Warren are called in here as well in order to investigate. Eventually, the church comes in to exorcise the house (apparently they believe houses can be possessed now). After the exorcism the house is clear. The haunting is lifted. Yet the hands are found missing from the Madonna statue used in the ritual. That’s a little disturbing.

However, in a documentary, the Warren’s nephew speaks of an encounter with a ghost in the house, in which the ghost said “Do you know what was done to us here?” The house had been a funeral home before turned into a family home. The inference is that ghosts haunt the house, the spirits of those corpses abused by a sadistic funeral director.

So again, we have both– demons exorcised by the priests and surviving personalities– ghosts.

You cannot have both!

Every famous “haunting” becomes surrounded by those who try and work every angle. The result is the consistent presentation of the inconsistency in all haunted house stories.

A haunting is so ambiguous that the only consistent thing about it is the inconsistency of the theories. They are all based on interpretation or. . . quite frankly on grandstanding.

Yet all haunted house stories do begin with one consistent thing. They all share this. And it is what begins the “haunting.” We’ll look at this in our next post.

* * *

Since 1990 Gian J. Quasar has investigated a broad range of mysterious subjects, from strange disappearances to serial murders, earning in that time the unique distinction of being likened to “the real life Kolchak.” However, he is much more at home with being called The Quester or Q Man. “He’s bloody eccentric, an historian with no qualifications who sticks his nose into affairs and gets results.” He is the author of several books, one of which inspired a Resolution in Congress.

I introduce this autumn season with an excerpt from my upcoming Amityville Horror book. . . .We will deal more with this form of quest in the future, so I think it best to lay a foundation for interpretation.

“All hauntings are subjective. That is why they are so frightening. They are the cumulative result of the interpretation of events the participants feel are unusual; the more unusual the more they will be interpreted as naturally impossible. There can be no other interpretation to the naturally impossible but to believe that it is supernaturally possible— to be explicit, an intelligence is behind them. With this we have now tread into the theory of the supernatural as the explanation.

If true hauntings were like their movie personas there would be little to fear. If ghosts were easy to see moving about a home in their routine, they would soon be nothing more than a botheration. If Sir Percy carried his head under his arm nightly while moaning in the passageways one would grow tired of him. There would be no fear. It would simply get to be too much. We’d pack our traps and move out in a huff. Fear would long have been vanquished and replaced by irk at the inconvenience of it all.

An unseen enemy or potential enemy is what we fear. Fear is in the present. It can be dealt with. Anxiety, however, is over the future. It grows more intense. We do not fear what we do not know as much as we fear what might possibly be. Fear of what is will eventually subside. But fear of what is to come is what truly haunts us.

By no means am I minimizing a haunting. Nor is this an endorsement that hauntings are caused by supernatural forces. I am underscoring that the interpretation of the effect and not the cause is the source of the haunting within us. Whether the effect was set in motion by an unknown natural phenomenon or, indeed, by a supernatural entity, there is no difference. We are left to interpret otherwise ambiguous but abnormal effects. And it will be our interpretation that sets us on edge.

Knowledge builds upon knowledge. In all things, data adds to the interpretation of more data. The human mind cannot stop the process. A few strange sounds in an old house might be unnerving, but when added to yet more unexplained events— cupboards found open, doors that slam on their own— and we begin to ponder and try to add it up. Mixed with our personality, our conclusions will drive us to action.”

I believe it is essential to understand the subjective nature of all true hauntings because the essence of the haunting is within us. It is not possible to understand such famous cases as the Amityville Horror otherwise. Nor is it possible to truly investigate a “haunted house” if one is looking for overt external stimuli.

The current case of The Westfield Watcher is an excellent example and a study of it will impose upon all who partake of it what the true nature of a haunting is like upon those who experience it.

The case is not a supernatural one, of course. The “entity” in this case is flesh and blood, but he/she is using the principals of a haunting coupled with those attributes of terror only a stalker can impose upon us. By writing odd and disquieting letters to the new owners of 657 Boulevard in Westfield, New Jersey, indicating that he “watches” the house and is perpetually entrusted to do so, The Watcher has scared the family out of their large Dutch colonial and made it certain no one will want to buy it.

The writer has carefully thought out their gambol of fear. The family children have been referred to as “young blood.” There is no overt statement of harm (at least that we know of), but The Watcher craftily worded the statement: asking if they have filled the house with “young blood” like he had requested.

The Watcher claims to be the third in his line to watch the house. His grandfather watched it, then in the 1960s his father took over the duties, and now this present watcher is obliged to do so.

Naturally, the letters coupled with the inference The Watcher will continue to stalk the house has driven the family into a financially difficult situation. They don’t know if the writer intends to visit the house. No one wants to go to sleep thinking they should awake to see a madman standing over their bed. The worst thing is the family has children. Put yourself in their situation. No one knows where a stalker may strike. Your children could be walking to the corner to catch the bus. This madman could come to school and persuade the kids to leave with him.

There are any number of scenarios. We need not hear from the parents, Derek and Maria Broaddus, in person to know what must be going through their minds. Fear tortures. The probability that this is just a letter-writing crank doesn’t assuage the fears I’m sure. Who really knows? And, once again, terror lies in the anticipation, not in the mournful aftermath.

The Watcher was thought to have been a crank who only briefly terrorized the family back in late 2014 to early 2015, when he or she wrote 3 letters of such a “disturbing” nature the family became paranoid. Then it was learned that a few days before closing the deal, the previous couple had received a letter, the nature of which we do not know. A lawsuit is ongoing between the two families.

In the long history of the old home it has been passed along to the next family for $1. This is, of course, until the Woods bought it. They had no issues until they sold it to the present family, the Broadduses. It was they who received a latter a few days before closing the deal, and they didn’t think anything of it.

Vacant and quiet. The “for sale” sign is dwarfed by the ancient trees. It’s a “no takers acres” because of the bizarre and mysterious “Watcher.”

The letters to the Broadduses are, however, not the stuff one forgets. And now they are not confined to a few years ago. At the beginning of this year The Watcher wrote again. The letter’s contents are withheld, but it is worse and more “disturbing” than the previous letters. The Broadduses can’t sell the property. They have rented it, but they want to destroy this old “stigmatized” house and the Planning Board won’t let them.

The only solution, of course, is to expose The Watcher– discover who this terrorizing crank is. The stigma is gone. No one need fear buying the house and thinking this jacket job will write more letters or one day pop up in the basement.

The clues are there that The Watcher knows the odd history of the house and how it was passed along. From what has been released, The Watcher knows not to make overt threats, reflecting the Watcher’s understanding of the legal complications should they be exposed. The Watcher has also worded things in such a manner that the Broadduses are not the object of his attention. Rather, it is the house. Thus he has stigmatized the property and not the family. But he has also made it impossible for the family to sell the house. Thus it seems that perhaps the family is the object of The Watcher.

Some think it could be an old real estate enemy of the family. But it may be a member of one of the previous families that didn’t care about the rumors the Broadduses were going to do a lot of renovation to the old house. The Watcher has even asked if they have found something in the “walls” of the house.

I will go over the letters in more detail in following posts to see if this does not help us expose this very calculating suburban terrorist of Anywhere USA.

* * *

Since 1990 Gian J. Quasar has investigated a broad range of mysterious subjects, from strange disappearances to serial murders, earning in that time the unique distinction of being likened to “the real life Kolchak.” However, he is much more at home with being called The Quester or Q Man. “He’s bloody eccentric, an historian with no qualifications who sticks his nose into affairs and gets results.” He is the author of several books, one of which inspired a Resolution in Congress.

It was more website redesign that caused me to take down the pages on the Case of the Westfield Watcher than the lawsuit threats. I was threatened repeatedly with lawsuit over the article on my site, the claim being I infringed on copyright of a photograph. The haunting case, though it is on the backburner of the topic of strange and unique true crime incidents, obviously has left an indelible mark on my mind.

It’s a case that can and should be solved. I grew up in an old home, and the thought of this beautiful old Dutch colonial in New Jersey being destroyed is terrible. And the new owners (since 2014) have wanted to do that in order to build two different homes on the property and then dump it. That’s how bad they want out of the property.

The case is unique, of course, because it combines the elements of crime– a stalker writing disturbing letters– and a haunting; there is something within the house and a part of its strange past that the “Watcher” is a part of. The Watcher indicated he had watched the house, knew who was in what bedrooms, and even called the new owners’ children “young blood.” Tests on the letters later uncovered a woman’s DNA, but not the new owner’s wife.

The letters are, in fact, not a stunt by the new owners. This year, soon after renters moved into the white elephant, a new letter arrived, more disturbing than the others. The Watcher knows when new people move in. He or she remains silent until then. “It” does not want the house remodeled, let alone destroyed. The Westfield Planning Board has refused to let the owners demolish the old house.

The Woods, who sold the house to the Broadduses in 2014, were the first to receive a letter, just before moving. They insisted it wasn’t threatening. The Broadduses believe they should have been told a stalker came with the house. They sued the Woods. Now the renters have received a letter. The Watcher is faithful to “its” claims. He or She watches the house. Their stalking intent is against those therein. It does not appear directed at any family, just those in the house at a given time.

I will recap and update the case in my next blog post.

* * *

Since 1990 Gian J. Quasar has investigated a broad range of mysterious subjects, from strange disappearances to serial murders, earning in that time the unique distinction of being likened to “the real life Kolchak.” However, he is much more at home with being called The Quester or Q Man. “He’s bloody eccentric, an historian with no qualifications who sticks his nose into affairs and gets results.” He is the author of several books, one of which inspired a Resolution in Congress.

Unfortunately, due to all that I am up to in my hobby (being the questing Q-Man) and in real, boring life, I have not been able to update Q Files with sections reflecting the cases I am organizing in True Crime and Cold Case. I express myself here, in the less permanent and artsy world of my blok.

One period in time I am particularly interested in– the antiestablishment movement. It is the inseparable background to the ZODIAC Killer’s crime spree and others, the nuances in each intimately inspired by it. The crimes and seasons inexorably linked to it are fascinating . . . and I think that similar outcroppings from the new antiestablishment movement is something that modern law enforcement must brace themselves for, but not in terms of anti-riot but in terms of Homicide investigation.

Riot breaks out in Los Angeles 1970 after flag burning started at the Brown Power protests.

The late 1960s and 1970s were an edgy time. Society was disturbed by the massive movement of the counterculture. It was seen in daily life. It was seen in “folk” festivals like the Altamont and Woodstock. The civil rights movement was becoming more heated, especially after Martin Luther King Jr had been assassinated. Black power and brown power (Hispanic) rallies intensified. There were riots. Flag burning. Neo Nazis (yes, they’ve been around a long time) came out and paraded too, fully dressed in their Nuremburg rally uniforms.

A clip from Robert Hendrickson’s film Inside the Manson Gang. The filmmaker was able to record the tumultuous 1970 as the backdrop to Manson’s alarming murder rampage.

Charles Manson both believed in Helter Skelter and tried to manipulate its advent. His Tate/La Bianca murders inspired dread in Los Angeles, and showed how the tumultuous social times could incubate more demented counter-cults. What was essential to Helter Skelter was attacking the “establishment” — wealthy people whose murders would get lots of media attention.

The colorful flamboyance of the counterculture of the late 1960s transposed into the grim urban reality of the early to mid-1970s. In this era we saw unusual crime sprees– chic urban guerillas like The Symbionese Liberation Army, the bizarre Zebra Killings, and the advent of some of the most resourceful serial killers there have been.

Patty Hearst poses with the symbol of SLA.

Anchored by the stalwart Great Generation, the nation survived, changing but intact. The establishment was solid. It was united in trying to understand the counterculture. It disapproved. Some delighted in certain philosophic issues it brought forward, but no one tried to manipulate it for political upheaval. There was too much upheaval coming to the fore anyway, all an outcropping of the “antiestablishment” attitude. By the 1970s some of the looser morals and ideas “counterculture” had gestated were being embraced by a broader range of established society, but people were growing tired of the ghastly crime waves and riots.

The flower power of the 1960s was long gone and racial and political tensions replaced it. Along with this, of course, we began to wonder on the motive. It was protest for the sake of protest. It was robbing banks in the name of liberation. We were sure the “commies” were behind it all. Protesting got old, and a well known KGO radio host (San Francisco) finally condemned an anti-nuke protest at 3 Mile Island as “rent-a-mob.” Sound familiar today? The parallels are all over the place.

Flower power, music, folk festivals, ebbed to the dark world of political and social urban tensions. In like manner today,the peaceful “Occupy” movement of near a decade ago has long ebbed to . . . a remarkable version of the 1970s, only darker and without any preaching of Aquarius.

In the 1970s thrill killers also got emboldened. The Sonoma Co-ed Killer was a horrid sadist of the early 1970s. Bundy would arise. Gacy was filling the floorboards of his house with victims. There were others, of course.

Gacy posed with Rosalind Carter for a political picture. One of the members of Antifa arrested at Berkeley for packing heat had posed with Hillary Clinton. It wasn’t Rosalind Carter’s fault a serial killer posed with her. Nor is it Hillary Clinton’s fault a terrorist posed with her. It reveals that both terrorists and killers can rub shoulders with the light of day before dawning their evil alter egos.

Today, we are well within this new antiestablishment movement. It is and it is not like the original. There is no eastern mysticism and philosophy driving it. In fact, diversity doesn’t drive it. It is largely political, driven by what are called anarcho-communists (Antifa) who are now believed to be in the pay of a real life Ernst Stavro Blofeld, James Bond’s ultimate nemesis, whose goal is to disrupt and destroy the USA. One other thing has been established– our never-ending Carthage– the Russians– have been proven to have backed online ads whose purpose is to cause social divisions in the country. This is no small thing. The ads inspire a pious element within a generation raised without humor. There was no 25 years of “political correctness” hawking on the Baby Boomer generation. This generation has learned to react to words based on how the internet reacts to their usage. Intolerance rather than purpose motivates these protestors.

Everybody is a fascist, for instance. Some Simple Simon online defenses of Antifa note that it stands for “anti-Fascist” and thus they must be good people because the real fascists were bad people. Thus the arguments glibly overlook that communists were antifascists and they butchered more people than the Nazis. And with Antifa everyone else is a fascist. One scribbled: “The Liberals will get the bullet too.”

I am fascinated by Antifa, not for what they are but for what their existence represents in an the milestones of an “antiestablishment” movement. My little Antifula! They are the tip of a Thug-like iceberg. Within the dark recesses, there is something else festering, even more pious and illiterate than the bulk.

The political killers. The thrill killers.

The milestones are already in place. Racial tensions are at their highest since the late 1960s. Protests not only returned with the “Occupy movement,” they are now turning violent in the hands of Antifa. But it is not anti-war. Nor is there an “average” protestor or diverse protests like back in the original antiestablishment. Antifa is it, and they are a violent crowd. With their pious, brute minds they are the antithesis of the original counterculture flower children. They burn signs reading “Free Speech” and they try some very simple publicity stunts– shields that read “No Hate” which they then use to beat others. After they are crushed, from within them there is room for teh beginning of a truly vile Manson type of cult or something far worse than the Symbionese Liberation Army.

One of the most fascinating and early symbols– the gunsight symbol (also used by the Zodiac Killer) adjusted with the “A” for Antifa. This was lettered onto the limo at the Trump inauguration– Antifa’s first big protest. They were ready awfully fast.

So much is similar today to 50 years ago, but the “peace” element isn’t there. They do not protest a war. Antifa protests people holding a different political view. Antifa are not one of several protests. They are it. They are a violent incarnation of the bizarre “political correctness” that has been stifling expression since the 1990s. They carry weapons in order to eliminate guest speakers and they riot in order to keep others from hearing another point of view. They are the product of a lot of indulgence, decades of it. They have been allowed to make up their own meaning to words, and today they have labeled all but themselves the bad guys.

Neo-Nazis essentially don’t even really exist anymore. They are a strange outcropping of biker culture– ghastly rednecks with tattoos and redneck philosophy. Basically, they deserve the distinction of being Eric von Zipper and his Rat Pack. Antifa butt heads with them once. Now anybody with a different protest agenda is listed as a Neo Nazi.

Watching Robert Hendrickson’s two films– Manson (1973) and Inside the Manson Gang (2007) are essential to understanding what America was like 1970, and from this to see how similar and yet darker this current antiestablishment movement is. He filmed American parades, the Brown berets in charge of a Mexican-American protest in LA, gays marching with signs in protest of being beaten and, as expected, genuine Neo-Nazis, a pathetic sideshow to the rest.

The problem today is that Antifa would attack them all as “fascists.” It kinda ruins the diversity and humor of many of the protests. There is, in fact, little chance at the diversity of opinion because Antifa is there, hooded and with black body armor and masks. The nation was prosperous 50 years ago, but the Great Recession helped incubate Antifa and its communist ideology to destroy wealth. One even expressed it would be better to live in Stalin’s Russia. You can’t find a Russian communist who would admit to that. The nation is worried about the lack of trust created by the banking and housing collapse 10 years ago. Antifa is part of the result, and they have made sure this is a back and white argument between them and all others.

As we saw 50 years ago, when edginess dominates a society even the criminal element becomes far more emboldened. What should we expect today? Manson, The ZODIAC, Zebra, SLA, all sought to exploit terror. What should we expect from serial killers? We should expect some to exploit the fear of the times and become more ingenious. This supposition is not based on using only the antiestablishment movement as a guide. The later part of the 1880s was a very tumultuous time in London socially. In 1888, Jack the Ripper took advantage of it by slaying drabs in Whitechapel and then trying to exacerbate the crime spree into anti-Semitic riots.

We are in a twisted, far more violent and less philosophic Orwellian era, and we should brace ourselves for what is festering in dark shadows. Antifa dominates the public protests because they will attack anyone else protesting. But there is much unrest out there, and this is a violent and far more complex mix of dissatisfaction than 50 years ago.

* * *

Since 1990 Gian J. Quasar has investigated a broad range of mysterious subjects, from strange disappearances to serial murders, earning in that time the unique distinction of being likened to “the real life Kolchak.” However, he is much more at home with being called The Quester or Q Man. “He’s bloody eccentric, an historian with no qualifications who sticks his nose into affairs and gets results.” He is the author of several books, one of which inspired a Resolution in Congress.

Because he was so prolific in his prowling, stalking and attacking, and yet remained so phantom-like we have developed an understandable obsession with what EAR/ONS truly looked like at any given time in his long crime spree. Most of the composites show a “suspicious person” seen in the neighborhood. This could truly be anybody. Some show shoulder length hair. Most show shorter hair. When it comes to some of his features we can only speculate, but when it comes to his hair we can make some deductions.

We can look outside of composites at a few clues. Old cars were associated with someone stalking the respective neighborhoods where EAR would strike. In the case of Attack 40 on Montclair Place (Oct 28, 1978), the occupant of a car cruising the San Ramon cul-de-sac was seen to have short hair. This fit with an odd clue that police detectives uncovered at the scene of Attack 38 (Oct. 7, 1938)– a security guard’s badge was found dropped on the neighbor’s lawn. Did EAR drop this badge by mistake? Did he use it as a cover, lest he be seen and stopped? No one with long hair could get away with claiming he was a security guard.

On May 16, 1979, in a neighborhood perfect for an EAR attack (Danville), a woman came in from her garage (where she was doing laundry) and found a jogger walking through her living room. He was dressed in the usual jogging outfit and wore a black Navy skullcap. He bolted. There is no mention he had any noticeably long hair.

Richard Shelby writes of the prowler seen at El Capitan and Allegheny (just north of the previous witness sighting) in Danville the night of the attack on #46 (June 11, 1979). The description is a little radical to the description of EAR in height, but then it was nighttime. But Shelby notes that the hair on the prowler came to the nape of the neck– so not even midline.

In the Davis Co-Ed attack (#34) on June 7, 1978, recall that the victim saw him from behind and noted that the tag of his T-shirt was showing, indicating he had put his T-shirt on wrong-side-out. The stocking he wore over his head came to the nape of his neck. She did not note long hair. He also wore the skullcap on top– another great way to hide his hair color, which could show through the stocking.

Earlier sketches and police kit composites overwhelmingly show a young man with short to relatively short hair and a somewhat long face. Other than that EAR really has no other distinguishing features. He was a rather bland looking young man. No excessively large nose protruded from the ski masks. His eyes were given various colors by victims. He always disguised his voice.

In sum, EAR’s hair seemed to be short, parted on the right, and it grew out to the center of his neck. He liked the night and he may have masqueraded as a security guard, which required relatively short hair.

Today, this does help a bit, even though it is 40 years on now. It tells us a bit about him back then, and it tells us into what kind of society he could transpose during the day when finished with his night prowlings. It may even help jog people’s memory for back then. I think EAR/ONS was clever enough that he knew he had to look like the unsuspected lest he be stopped or seen when scouting a neighborhood. This means no long hair. This means nothing that should alert people’s suspicion. It obviously worked. For 40 years he has remained the unsuspected.

* * *

Since 1990 Gian J. Quasar has investigated a broad range of mysterious subjects, from strange disappearances to serial murders, earning in that time the unique distinction of being likened to “the real life Kolchak.” However, he is much more at home with being called The Quester or Q Man. “He’s bloody eccentric, an historian with no qualifications who sticks his nose into affairs and gets results.” He is the author of several books, one of which inspired a Resolution in Congress.